Thanks for all the reply s but it seems the post has gone a bit off track. From Tinkermans response I take it that it is a bad idea for me to take the DCA back to court but this seems very unfair. Surely if you follow the letter of the law you cannot have a charging order on someone's property for a debt that you no longer own! Why would a judge not allow this if at the time of completing the form the incorrect DCA name was registered with the land registry?

Thanks for the input. The reason I am looking to get the restriction removed is that the debt is for a shortfall mortgage from before I met my husband. He bought the house we currently live in and my name was only put on (after a lot of discussion, I didn't really want it to happen) following a health scare he had. You can imagine now that every time we have a row he starts having a go about my debt being secured on his house! To tell the truth I completely agree with him. What I am thinking is if I apply to the court to have the charge removed they will in turn inform the creditor who will not turn up as they no longer own the debt. I would then go with the argument that a DCA that has a restriction on my property for a debt that they no longer own and therefore the restriction should be removed and when (if) the new DCA apply to be substituted they can reapply for a charging order. I would then (very quickly) get a solicitor to draw up a legally binding agreement showing my interest in the property as a very low percentage as my husband put down a 50% deposit and has always paid the mortgage. Does anyone have any comment? Thanks

The new owners have not subsituted themselves as claimants with the courts and I am now paying the new owners the court agreed instalment every month even though I have no legal document to say they are entitled to collect it. If I went back to court now with a set a side defence of - The company who got the original judgement sold the debt to another company who obtained a charging order who then sold it to another company who after 12 months have not substituted themselves with the courts and therefore the charging order is invalid as I do not owe the company have it anything as they have sold the debt - would I be likely to succeed? Thanks in advance

Good evening Caggers, could I please run a thought past you and get some opinions. I have a charging order (restriction really) on my property and it has come to light that the party named on the restriction sold the ccj and restriction within weeks of getting it (January 2012). I have checked with the land registry and county court and they have not substituted themselves as claimants with the court and therefore the restriction has the wrong company's name on it. Would it be worth a go at having the restriction removed via the court as the company named on it no longer owns the debt and the company that do own it have not legally (via the county court) changed themselves to the claimants? All thoughts welcome.